Sam Bradford will very likely be the 2017 opening day starter for the Minnesota Vikings. There have been no updates from the team on the status of Teddy Bridgewater’s knee, but all indications are that his severe injury will not be healed and in game shape by next September. So the picture is clear for the start of next season. Looking any farther down the road at the Vikings’ quarterback situation, however, is where things get pretty foggy.

Perhaps I missed it but I don't think Coller addressed what I consider the elephant in the room: it's possible that neither Bradford or Bridgewater represent the Vikngs future for the QB position beyond 2017.

It seems clear to me that the job should be Bradford's to lose going forward. The level of optimism out there surrounding Bridgewater continues to surprise me but maybe he'll be able to come back strong.

I was reading an article by Kevin Siefert this morning in which he wrote that the Vikings will likely pick up Bridgewater's 5th year option in May. That surprised me

Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:14 pm

IrishViking

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 amPosts: 1631

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

I was about to ask. Is there any information Bridgewater's CURRENT condition? All I ever see is long term stuff but is he doing well now? Is he exceeding is PT expectations? Is he ahead, behind, etc.

Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:29 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37356Location: Chicago, IL

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

IrishViking wrote:

I was about to ask. Is there any information Bridgewater's CURRENT condition? All I ever see is long term stuff but is he doing well now? Is he exceeding is PT expectations? Is he ahead, behind, etc.

They talked about it a bit during the broadcast of yesterday's game but I haven't seen or heard anything very concrete on the subject. The actual status of his injury and recovery is being kept private.

Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:42 pm

IrishViking

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 amPosts: 1631

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

Mothman wrote:

IrishViking wrote:

I was about to ask. Is there any information Bridgewater's CURRENT condition? All I ever see is long term stuff but is he doing well now? Is he exceeding is PT expectations? Is he ahead, behind, etc.

They talked about it a bit during the broadcast of yesterday's game but I haven't seen or heard anything very concrete on the subject. The actual status of his injury and recovery is being kept private.

I know it is generally a private thing and Bridgewater has every right to that and that's fine, I just have to believe that if he was doing really well they would parading that stuff around like a hero dog. The fact that they are keeping quiet and touting Bradford loudly makes me believe a recovery to the point he could play football again is probably not realistic

Mon Jan 02, 2017 2:05 pm

mansquatch

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pmPosts: 3388Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

I'm not surprised. TB has the leadership qualities the team wants. He is on the sidelines all the time with his teammates. Whether he has the physical skills remains to be seen, but it is highly unlikely they'd find someone at the cost they'll pay TB. To me it makes sense from a cap perspective right now. Whether that is the case in a year or two remains to be seen.

IMO, this is insurance more than anything else. This position IMO is probably the least interesting on the offense going into this off season.

_________________Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

Sam Bradford will very likely be the 2017 opening day starter for the Minnesota Vikings. There have been no updates from the team on the status of Teddy Bridgewater’s knee, but all indications are that his severe injury will not be healed and in game shape by next September. So the picture is clear for the start of next season. Looking any farther down the road at the Vikings’ quarterback situation, however, is where things get pretty foggy.

Perhaps I missed it but I don't think Coller addressed what I consider the elephant in the room: it's possible that neither Bradford or Bridgewater represent the Vikngs future for the QB position beyond 2017.

It seems clear to me that the job should be Bradford's to lose going forward. The level of optimism out there surrounding Bridgewater continues to surprise me but maybe he'll be able to come back strong.

I was reading an article by Kevin Siefert this morning in which he wrote that the Vikings will likely pick up Bridgewater's 5th year option in May. That surprised me

So, if there have been no updates on his injury, how can they make the claim that "all indications are that his severe injury will not be healed"? Wouldn't you need some info to make that claim?

Sam Bradford will very likely be the 2017 opening day starter for the Minnesota Vikings. There have been no updates from the team on the status of Teddy Bridgewater’s knee, but all indications are that his severe injury will not be healed and in game shape by next September. So the picture is clear for the start of next season. Looking any farther down the road at the Vikings’ quarterback situation, however, is where things get pretty foggy.

Perhaps I missed it but I don't think Coller addressed what I consider the elephant in the room: it's possible that neither Bradford or Bridgewater represent the Vikngs future for the QB position beyond 2017.

It seems clear to me that the job should be Bradford's to lose going forward. The level of optimism out there surrounding Bridgewater continues to surprise me but maybe he'll be able to come back strong.

I was reading an article by Kevin Siefert this morning in which he wrote that the Vikings will likely pick up Bridgewater's 5th year option in May. That surprised me

So, if there have been no updates on his injury, how can they make the claim that "all indications are that his severe injury will not be healed"? Wouldn't you need some info to make that claim?

Well my understanding was that right off the bat they thought he wouldn't be ready, it would have taken a lots of good new for him to beat that mark, an average recovery time had him missing 2017 opener.

An extremely optimistic time table has him starting light unsupervised jogging in mid to late February. 6 months isn't a lot of time to go from short gentle slow jogs to 100% confidence in game day performance.

Mon Jan 02, 2017 4:09 pm

J. Kapp 11

Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pmPosts: 6853

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

I've been pretty clear in my position, but I'll take it a step further. Sam Bradford should be the starter ... even if Bridgewater is healed completely. He's simply a better quarterback.

What he accomplished -- with no OTAs, no training camp, learning a new system, working under 3 OCs, losing AP and both tackles, having his OC walk out halfway through the season, getting pummeled game after game -- is nothing short of phenomenal. With an entire season, he easily would have passed 4,000 yards. His interception percentage was less than 1%. While critics attribute his inordinately high completion percentage to short passes, it's important to note that he also ranked among the best in the league when he did throw the ball downfield. Teddy has never been a good downfield passer. The only thing Teddy had over SB is mobility, and Sam even improved on that toward the end of the season (and there's no guarantee that Teddy's mobility will be what it was prior to his injury).

I like Bridgewater as a person, and he seems to be really popular with his teammates. But Bradford is better, and that has to win the day IMO.

_________________Go ahead. I dare you.Underestimate this man.

Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:24 pm

Alaskan

Backup

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:47 pmPosts: 89

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

I've been pretty clear in my position, but I'll take it a step further. Sam Bradford should be the starter ... even if Bridgewater is healed completely. He's simply a better quarterback.

What he accomplished -- with no OTAs, no training camp, learning a new system, working under 3 OCs, losing AP and both tackles, having his OC walk out halfway through the season, getting pummeled game after game -- is nothing short of phenomenal. With an entire season, he easily would have passed 4,000 yards. His interception percentage was less than 1%. While critics attribute his inordinately high completion percentage to short passes, it's important to note that he also ranked among the best in the league when he did throw the ball downfield. Teddy has never been a good downfield passer. The only thing Teddy had over SB is mobility, and Sam even improved on that toward the end of the season (and there's no guarantee that Teddy's mobility will be what it was prior to his injury).

I like Bridgewater as a person, and he seems to be really popular with his teammates. But Bradford is better, and that has to win the day IMO.

Thumbs up. Good Post!

Mon Jan 02, 2017 11:02 pm

808vikingsfan

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pmPosts: 3220Location: Hawaii

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

I've been pretty clear in my position, but I'll take it a step further. Sam Bradford should be the starter ... even if Bridgewater is healed completely. He's simply a better quarterback.

What he accomplished -- with no OTAs, no training camp, learning a new system, working under 3 OCs, losing AP and both tackles, having his OC walk out halfway through the season, getting pummeled game after game -- is nothing short of phenomenal. With an entire season, he easily would have passed 4,000 yards. His interception percentage was less than 1%. While critics attribute his inordinately high completion percentage to short passes, it's important to note that he also ranked among the best in the league when he did throw the ball downfield. Teddy has never been a good downfield passer. The only thing Teddy had over SB is mobility, and Sam even improved on that toward the end of the season (and there's no guarantee that Teddy's mobility will be what it was prior to his injury).

I like Bridgewater as a person, and he seems to be really popular with his teammates. But Bradford is better, and that has to win the day IMO.

I'm still on the fence. I can't see how the Vikings can keep Bradford on the bench if both are healthy. But I still think Bridgewater has intangibles that Bradford doesn't. I can see Bridgeater being a better leader in the huddle. I also see him being better at extending plays when protection breaks down. Of course, it's hard to compare with how bad the OL has been these past several seasons. Also, with Peterson out, the Vikings play calling was not as predictable in 2016 which also adds another variable.

... Teddy Bridgewater has shown all the abilities to be a big time, productive quarterback given the opportunity. Unfortunately, he runs an offense whose strategy is, more often than not. . .

-First down - Handoff to Adrian Peterson-Second down - Handoff to Adrian Peterson-Third down - Hope that Bridgewater can make something happen with three or four defenders in his face and/or while running for his life because it's 3rd-and-7 and everyone knows the Vikings have to throw-Either punt on fourth down or repeat steps one through three

Bradford may be a better passer, but I have yet to be convinced that he's the better QB for this team, especially with how well Bridgewater was doing during camp and preseason.

I'll be happy with either as the starter. It's a good problem to have especially with the recent history at this position ( Ponder, Mcnabb, Jackson, Cassel, Holcomb).

I'm not surprised. TB has the leadership qualities the team wants. He is on the sidelines all the time with his teammates. Whether he has the physical skills remains to be seen, but it is highly unlikely they'd find someone at the cost they'll pay TB.

The "cost" for TB is going to be north of $10 mil if they pick up his 5th year option in a couple months as they are talking about doing. I find it impossible to believe any team would do that, much less one that already has a better QB in the fold who is just reaching his prime years.

Tue Jan 03, 2017 6:17 am

Texas Vike

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 amPosts: 3552

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

I've been pretty clear in my position, but I'll take it a step further. Sam Bradford should be the starter ... even if Bridgewater is healed completely. He's simply a better quarterback.

What he accomplished -- with no OTAs, no training camp, learning a new system, working under 3 OCs, losing AP and both tackles, having his OC walk out halfway through the season, getting pummeled game after game -- is nothing short of phenomenal. With an entire season, he easily would have passed 4,000 yards. His interception percentage was less than 1%. While critics attribute his inordinately high completion percentage to short passes, it's important to note that he also ranked among the best in the league when he did throw the ball downfield. Teddy has never been a good downfield passer. The only thing Teddy had over SB is mobility, and Sam even improved on that toward the end of the season (and there's no guarantee that Teddy's mobility will be what it was prior to his injury).

I like Bridgewater as a person, and he seems to be really popular with his teammates. But Bradford is better, and that has to win the day IMO.

Kapp, you're on a roll lately . It seems that every post I find myself nodding vigorously to is written by you lately.

Tue Jan 03, 2017 8:04 am

PurpleKoolaid

Hall of Famer

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pmPosts: 8226

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

Teddy would have to win the job from Sam at this point, and that would be very hard to do.

Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:57 pm

autobon7

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:20 pmPosts: 1021

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

PurpleKoolaid wrote:

Teddy would have to win the job from Sam at this point, and that would be very hard to do.

Agree

Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:06 am

mansquatch

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pmPosts: 3388Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

I still think they'll keep TB as a back up.

One angle on this is that is the team is in a window then it makes sense to pay Sam and push to get a championship. in that case, TB is a great option at backup, albeit expensive. Also, if TB performs well in a backup capacity they could trade him to recoup some of the draft pick used to acquire Sam in the first place.

If you think the team is not in a window, then it makes sense to resign TB, get him at a lower price next year and let Sam walk. TB is 5 years younger than Bradford and has time to help the team through a rebuild.

I think letting Teddy walk is as expensive as signing him. Right now we have 2 recent 1st round picks invested at QB. That is a lot to just let hit Free Agency, IMO.

_________________Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:21 pm

S197

Fenrir

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pmPosts: 10986Location: Hawaii

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

Man Clemmings in that first gif... And I'm not sure what the criticism is in the second, I don't see anyone open?

Anyway, to the point of the thread, Bradford/Bridgewater/Heinecke is better depth then we've seen in a long, long time. Who knows if anyone will be the answer but at least it's a respectable group for once.

I'm not surprised. I think a lot of Vikings fans somehow just never realized the severity of this injury or how truly career threatening it could be. I cannot imagine the Vikings give Teddy the 5th year option unless there is some kind of injury clause that can let them do it for a whole lot less. He's almost certainly done as a Viking, even if he can ever play again.

Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:11 pm

IrishViking

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 amPosts: 1631

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

I would assume that Teddy understands that staying on a roster should be his main goal. I would be stunned if they didn't try to stay with the vikings for the absolute minimum he can be paid.

Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:09 pm

fiestavike

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 amPosts: 3304

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

IrishViking wrote:

I would assume that Teddy understands that staying on a roster should be his main goal. I would be stunned if they didn't try to stay with the vikings for the absolute minimum he can be paid.

I guess its possible they could not take the 5th year and sign him as a free agent, but at this point. Moritz Boehringer has a significantly higher chance of ever playing a regular season snap for the Vikings than Teddy Bridgewater does.

Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:14 pm

808vikingsfan

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pmPosts: 3220Location: Hawaii

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

fiestavike wrote:

IrishViking wrote:

I would assume that Teddy understands that staying on a roster should be his main goal. I would be stunned if they didn't try to stay with the vikings for the absolute minimum he can be paid.

I guess its possible they could not take the 5th year and sign him as a free agent, but at this point. Moritz Boehringer has a significantly higher chance of ever playing a regular season snap for the Vikings than Teddy Bridgewater does.

Feel bad for the guy. Everything was looking great in preseason. He bulked up. He was hitting his downfield receivers. He had more zip in his passes. He looked comfortable and confident.

Last edited by 808vikingsfan on Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:44 pm

fiestavike

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 amPosts: 3304

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

808vikingsfan wrote:

fiestavike wrote:

IrishViking wrote:

I would assume that Teddy understands that staying on a roster should be his main goal. I would be stunned if they didn't try to stay with the vikings for the absolute minimum he can be paid.

I guess its possible they could not take the 5th year and sign him as a free agent, but at this point. Moritz Boehringer has a significantly higher chance of ever playing a regular season snap for the Vikings than Teddy Bridgewater does.

Feel bad for the guy. Everything was looking great in preseason. He bulked up. He was hitting his downfield receivers. He had more zip in his passes. He looked comfortable and confident.

If he ever starts another NFL game, whatever team he is playing for WILL be my favorite team.

I think that is probably a smart move with the Vikings FO for not rushing Teddy. He was never going to be football ready for the beginning of the season. So why rush him.

Guess time will tell.

Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:13 pm

RFIP

Veteran

Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:02 pmPosts: 212

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

fiestavike wrote:

I guess its possible they could not take the 5th year and sign him as a free agent, but at this point. Moritz Boehringer has a significantly higher chance of ever playing a regular season snap for the Vikings than Teddy Bridgewater does.

Feel bad for the guy. Everything was looking great in preseason. He bulked up. He was hitting his downfield receivers. He had more zip in his passes. He looked comfortable and confident.[/quote]

If he ever starts another NFL game, whatever team he is playing for WILL be my favorite team.[/quote]

I understand your sentiment as I feel the exact same way about Sam Bradford. And now both have been struck down by horrific injury situations. All the best to Teddy both on and off the field.

Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:57 am

Pondering Her Percy

Hall of Fame Inductee

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 amPosts: 4921Location: Watertown, NY

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

808vikingsfan wrote:

Yeah man that TD to Rudolph was a legitimate dart! I hope the guy can recover

_________________

Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:23 am

chicagopurple

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 amPosts: 1269

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

It would be pointless for the team to sell the farm to buy a top shelf QB or even a great college QB draft (there are none in this years draft anyway). Bradford is completely serviceable as a leader in a team fighting to be an average NFL team. Until we have a real OL no QB will have top tier potential. We also dont really have a RB to support a Super Bowl Run. There are far bigger issues to face rather then considering replacing Bradford.....for what we are, he is good enough.

Wed Feb 01, 2017 3:35 pm

halfgiz

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pmPosts: 1707

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

With the timeline for Teddy at 19months . The the next question is what QB's is going to be on our roster this year.

It would be pointless for the team to sell the farm to buy a top shelf QB or even a great college QB draft (there are none in this years draft anyway). Bradford is completely serviceable as a leader in a team fighting to be an average NFL team. Until we have a real OL no QB will have top tier potential. We also dont really have a RB to support a Super Bowl Run. There are far bigger issues to face rather then considering replacing Bradford.....for what we are, he is good enough.

It's OL and RB we really need to assess. It's not like we're having to do a complete rebuild or something. With the defense we have, we aren't very far off. It's not like this is something we can't fix. We have talent all over the roster. Defense as a whole, WR, TE, QB. Do you realize how many teams out there CANT say that?

_________________

Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:48 pm

chicagopurple

All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 amPosts: 1269

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

its true that we have a limited area that needs to be upgraded. The bad part is that the OL is a complete failure and every position needs to be completely upgraded during a time in the NFL where OL is a priority for many teams so the picking are slim. Moreover, we have a GM who has shown little interest in committing to building a SuperBowl quality OL and little skill when he HAS many an effort.

As far as running back goes, we have 2 part timer journeymen backs who are just competent enough to give Spielman an excuse for not improving that position......

Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:06 am

Pondering Her Percy

Hall of Fame Inductee

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 amPosts: 4921Location: Watertown, NY

Re: The future of the Vikings, part 1: The quarterbacks

chicagopurple wrote:

The bad part is that the OL is a complete failure and every position needs to be completely upgraded

No. LG and C dont need to be "completely upgraded". Boone and Berger were our only 2 good OL. Can we provide some depth behind them? Yes. But to say those positions need to be completely upgraded is false.

Quote:

Moreover, we have a GM who has shown little interest in committing to building a SuperBowl quality OL and little skill when he HAS many an effort.

That doesnt mean he cant improve the OL this year. Guys held what he did in Miami over his head for the longest time too. It's a new year. The past is the past. You assess as you go. I think it's pretty damn clear to him and the coaching staff that the OL is an issue. So do you think they are just going to ignore it or something?? It's a world-known thing that one thing holding this team back is the OL. Just because he didnt put into it what some wanted the past few years doesnt mean he wont do it this year. Especially due to the offensive struggles. I have no worries.

Quote:

As far as running back goes, we have 2 part timer journeymen backs who are just competent enough to give Spielman an excuse for not improving that position......

No again. It's almost like you look for stuff to pull out of a hat to try and make Spielman look bad. You're trying too hard man. We had the last ranked running offense in the NFL. Why would Spielman, or any GM for that matter, not assess that position?? Lets be realistic here.